↓ Skip to main content

Hemodynamic monitoring using a single-use indwelling transesophageal echocardiography probe in an unstable patient after open-heart surgery

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Imaging, August 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
19 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Hemodynamic monitoring using a single-use indwelling transesophageal echocardiography probe in an unstable patient after open-heart surgery
Published in
BMC Medical Imaging, August 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12880-015-0070-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Emmanuelle Begot, Marc Clavel, Alessandro Piccardo, Rémi Bellier, Bruno François, Nicolas Pichon, Philippe Vignon

Abstract

Hemodynamic monitoring is frequently needed in ventilated patients with unstable hemodynamics after open-heart surgery. Novel miniaturized single-use transesophageal echocardiographic probe has been scarcely used in this clinical setting. A patient who underwent a scheduled open-heart surgery developed a ventilator-associated pneumonia and was referred to the intensive care unit for post-operative acute respiratory distress syndrome. Hemodynamic monitoring was performed with a single-use indwelling transesophageal echocardiography probe during 50 h. Initially, a contrast study depicted a patent foramen ovale with a right-to-left shunt. Nitric oxide was administered and positive end-expiration pressure was reduced. Subsequently, the patient became hemodynamically unstable and the identification of a localized tamponade due to compressive left atrial hematoma prompted reoperation. The novel hemodynamic monitoring device described here appears valuable to help identifying severe post-operative complications and guide acute care.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 19 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Chile 1 5%
Unknown 18 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Postgraduate 3 16%
Researcher 3 16%
Other 2 11%
Student > Bachelor 2 11%
Student > Master 2 11%
Other 4 21%
Unknown 3 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 10 53%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 11%
Social Sciences 1 5%
Psychology 1 5%
Engineering 1 5%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 4 21%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 August 2015.
All research outputs
#2,914,102
of 5,482,492 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Imaging
#115
of 197 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#104,529
of 192,037 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Imaging
#8
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 5,482,492 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 197 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.2. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 192,037 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.